P L D (Rev (PLP)
Sh. KHURSHID AHMAD‑Appellant Versus THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
| Citation | P L D (Rev (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Akhtar Hussain Financial Commissioner |
| Parties | Sh. KHURSHID AHMAD‑Appellant Versus THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D (Rev (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D (Rev (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Akhtar Hussain Financial Commissioner.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D (Rev (PLP) (Sh. KHURSHID AHMAD‑Appellant Versus THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Kh. Abdur Rahim, for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
Motor Vehicles Act (IV of 1939), S. 63‑Countersigning Permits‑‑Preference to be given to persons already operating. Present :‑‑ Secretary Regional Transport Authority, Rawalpindi. ORDER AKHTAR HUSSAIN, F. C.--‑The Regional Transport Authority had refused to countersign the public carrier's permit of the appellant for the North Western Frontier Province. The reason for the refusal was that the appellant and others had already enjoyed these countersignatures for a petty long time and that it would be fair that countersignatures should be allowed by rotation according to the serial number of the permits and that no owner should be given more than one turn even if he may own more than one permit. The reason given by the Regional Transport Authority not to allow countersignatures to a person who had already enjoyed these countersignatures for a long time, is not plausible. (?) The person operating a certain route is entitled to get preference over the persons who did not operate on that route and similarly the persons already operating on the basis of the countersignatures, between Punjab and N. W. F. Province are entitled to get. preference over the new comers to secure counter signatures. I, therefore, accept this appeal and direct that the appellant's permit should be countersigned for N. W. F. Province. Announced. A. H Appeal accepted.
Judgment & Decree
AKHTAR HUSSAIN, F. C.--‑The Regional Transport Authority had refused to countersign the public carrier's permit of the appellant for the North Western Frontier Province. The reason for the refusal was that the appellant and others had already enjoyed these countersignatures for a petty long time and that it would be fair that countersignatures should be allowed by rotation according to the serial number of the permits and that no owner should be given more than one turn even if he may own more than one permit. The reason given by the Regional Transport Authority not to allow countersignatures to a person who had already enjoyed these countersignatures for a long time, is not plausible. (?) The person operating a certain route is entitled to get preference over the persons who did not operate on that route and similarly the persons already operating on the basis of the countersignatures, between Punjab and N. W. F. Province are entitled to get. preference over the new comers to secure counter signatures. I, therefore, accept this appeal and direct that the appellant's permit should be countersigned for N. W. F. Province. Announced. A. H Appeal accepted.